Would anyone be so kind as to give me their opinions on this Wittmann document? I believe the feldpost number is valid and the contents of the message seem valid given that Wittmann had just visited Henschel a few days earlier. I am no expert but the signature seems acceptable to me after comparing it to other examples I found online. I was hoping I could get the opinion of the document as a whole and of the signature from those more knowledgeable than me.
I have been able to verify that there was an engineer at Henschel named Robert A. Pertuss. There are some quotes from him in the book "Tiger I and Sturmtiger in Detail" by Uwe Feist and Bruce Culver. Of course if the document was faked they could easily have gotten the name from the book. There is also a photo of Wittmann with Herr Pertuss here: http://www.wehrmachtlexikon.de/archiv1/ ... 26525a369b
Here is a closeup of the signature.
I would be grateful for any opinions.
Thank you,
Alan Hamby
Opinions on this Michael Wittmann letter
Re: Opinions on this Michael Wittmann letter
I´m not familiar with Wittmann nor his signature. But was is it common to mention in a heading that he is "SS- Obersturmführer in a tank unit of the LSSAH"?
Re: Opinions on this Michael Wittmann letter
Alan,
Looks like air bubbles in the signature..., don't see "cross-overs",.... (hard to tell from a photo) but if so that means a printed signature... then could be "fake" or could be "stock" homefront "war production" propaganda done by the propaganda ministry...
Letterhead and style don't seem convincing to me..... are any "other" examples known (same Wittmann letterhead)? Burden of proof would be very high on this IMO.
See if anyone else offers thier opinion.... there are document experts "out there".... but I wouldn't "risk the farm" from what I'm seeing.
John G.
Looks like air bubbles in the signature..., don't see "cross-overs",.... (hard to tell from a photo) but if so that means a printed signature... then could be "fake" or could be "stock" homefront "war production" propaganda done by the propaganda ministry...
Letterhead and style don't seem convincing to me..... are any "other" examples known (same Wittmann letterhead)? Burden of proof would be very high on this IMO.
See if anyone else offers thier opinion.... there are document experts "out there".... but I wouldn't "risk the farm" from what I'm seeing.
John G.
Re: Opinions on this Michael Wittmann letter
Thank you very much for your replies!
Here are more closeups of the signature:
Alan
Here are more closeups of the signature:
Alan
-
- Member
- Posts: 262
- Joined: 13 Mar 2002, 13:08
- Location: USA
Re: Opinions on this Michael Wittmann letter
100% Fake
Just compared it to my 4 originals + 4 others I know to be good and the one I have seen the tt cross that looks good to me.
There is much wrong with this signature.
Just compared it to my 4 originals + 4 others I know to be good and the one I have seen the tt cross that looks good to me.
There is much wrong with this signature.